You know what's funny?
With the media crowing that the GOP is "on board" with strikes on Syria, there's a little something that's lost. Namely, the fact that the right-leaning politicians are being consistent - they understood the necessity of US force to prevent out-of-control agents in the middle east from attacking their own citizens back in 2003 - heck, back in 1991 for that matter. Unlike their counterparts on the left side, their support does not change based on the political affiliation of the President.
Nancy Pelosi, who voted against US involvement in Kuwait in 1991, is on the record as supporting action against Syria. Can anyone explain this? Saddam Hussein, fresh from using chemical weapons against Iran, invaded Kuwait, a US ally. This was not sufficient to draw the support of Pelosi, yet she's willing to side with terrorists in Syria over allegations of chemical warfare? And, of course, there's the spectacle of Secretary of State Lurch - who was against the war in Iraq before he voted for it - running around trying to drum up support for action in Syria.
Of course, there are former hawks that are jumping up and down swearing that we have no business intervening in Syria. Some, most certainly, are opposing action simply because Barack Obama is a Democrat; others are opposing on the basis that Syria isn't posing a threat to the US. Most, though, recognize that a government that readily uses chemical weapons against its own people is one that we need to be keeping an eye on - and, if necessary, send a strong message.
The problem, of course, is that the message has to be genuine and readily backed up by more action if needed. It's hard to tell if this radical change of heart from Barack Obama - who, remember, campaigned against John McCain on the basis of having voted for the war in Iraq - will last long enough to see action in Syria through. If this is an action borne out of solid intel that shows a quick, decisive show of force would be sufficient to change the tide, then have it.
Otherwise, heed the words of yourselves more than ten years prior when that drooling idiot cowboy Bush was planning action in Iraq...
That is all.